* Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 10:24 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> > From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 10:14:22 +1000
> > Subject: [PATCH] perfcounters: remove powerpc definitions of perf_counter_do_pending
> >
> > Commit 925d519ab82b6dd7aca9420d809ee83819c08db2 ("perf_counter:
> > unify and fix delayed counter wakeup") added global definitions.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Acked-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Ah - thanks. The bug was caused by me being a bit too optimistic in
applying the shiny-new Power7 support patches on the last day. (nice
CPU btw.)
> Linus, please apply. BTW, This is _EXACTLY_ why this should have
> been in -next for a few days before being merged :-(
Not really: for example current upstream is build-broken on x86 due
to an integration artifact via the kmemleak tree - despite it having
been in linux-next for months.
Paulus was building and booting powerpc on a daily basis and i ran
cross-builds as well.
Such bugs happen, and they are easy enough to fix. What matters
arent the 1-2 short-lived bugs that do happen when a new combination
of trees is created, but the long-lived combination bugs and
conflicts.
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
